Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safe-read nature is covered. However, the description adds no extra behavioral context beyond annotations, such as pagination behavior, default ordering, or authentication requirements. With only the description, an agent would not know if the tool returns all users by default or how the query parameter affects results.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single sentence with no fluff, making it concise. However, it is under-specified; it lacks any additional structure or context that would help with invocation, such as parameter usage or response details. This is borderline under-specification rather than effective conciseness.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool has a relatively simple purpose but includes three parameters, one being a nested object, and no output schema. The one-line description is inadequate to fully understand behavior, especially the 'query' parameter and pagination semantics. Given the presence of many sibling list tools, more context would be needed to choose and use this tool correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has zero description coverage for all three parameters ('page', 'query', 'page_size'), and the description does not compensate. It provides no explanation of what 'query' should contain, the structure of the nested object, or how pagination works. An agent cannot infer the expected input formats from the given information.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's function with a specific verb ('Lista') and resource ('usuários do escritório'), and it distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'easyjur_get_user' and other list tools for different entities.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, or on any exclusions or conditions. The one-line description offers no context about pagination, filtering, or typical use cases.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.